Re: [Gendispatch] draft charter text: terminology-related WG

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 15-Feb-21 09:46, Fernando Gont wrote:
> Hi, Jay,
> 
> On 14/2/21 17:24, Jay Daley wrote:
> [...]
>> Having wealthy, credentialed, white people take the issue of diversity 
>> and inclusivity seriously enough 
> 
> Indeed, this is what I am *asking* the IETF to do.
> 
> But this *is not* what is being done.

Sorry, but I think that's not quite fair.

1. There is a fairly simple problem to solve: use of language that some groups of readers find to be exclusionary or worse. We can solve that by a simple, focussed document that basically says "don't do that" and, going forward, as part of the normal document review and editing process. That's the goal of the proposed short-lived WG.

2. There is a much more complex and broader problem to solve: inclusiveness and diversity among IETF participants and leadership. I don't think we've even started the analysis of that problem in a serious way, let alone worked out the direction of possible solutions. That should be done, but glancing at my calendar, it seems like something that the new IETF Chair should put on their To Do list. A starting point could be draft-somebody-gendispatch-diversity-analysis. Whether it ends up with a WG charter or some other mechanism is still an open question IMHO.

Regards
    Brian